The world owes a great debt of gratitude to the explanatory powers of Lord Christopher Monckton, my 2009 Man of the Year.

His magnificent speeches have done more than any others to alert the world to the ulterior motives of the global warmmongers.

But even a great man can have an off day.

In this letter to Kevin Rudd, Lord Monckton seems more intent on showing off his Latin, Italian and French than making sure his readers understand his point:

Therefore, a fortiori, transnational or global governments should also be made and unmade by voters at the ballot-box.

In fact I have never argued that, though in general the market is better at solving problems thanthe habitual but repeatedly-failed dirigisme of the etatistes predominant in the classe politique today.

The questions I address are a) whether there is a climate problem at all; and b) even if there is one, and even if per impossibile it is of the hilariously-overblown magnitude imagined by the IPCC, whether waiting and adapting as and if necessary is more cost-effective than attempting to mitigate the supposed problem by trying to reduce the carbon dioxide our industries and enterprises emit.

Let us pretend, solum ad argumentum, that a given proportionate increase in CO2 concentration causes the maximum warming imagined by the IPCC.

The answer is that the “global warming” theory is not true, and no amount of bluster or braggadocio, ranting or rodomontade will make it true.

Three Latin and four French expressions in five paragraphs. (And the Italian braggadocio for good measure.)

Now I studied French for seven years and Latin for two, but I confess I had to look up a fortiori, dirigisme, solum ad argumentum and rodomontade.

How about you? Am I the only ignoramus who’d have preferred he’d stuck to the English?

Here, in case you need them, are the translations:

a fortiori ‘Even more so’: if all donkeys bray, then a fortiori all young donkeys bray.

Poneke launches a trenchant attack on the greenwashing exercise that is Earth Hour:

We humans are not a pestilence on this planet. We should be proud of our achievements – art and science, jet aircraft and vaccination, space travel, computers, electricity, great civilisations, the lifting from poverty of billions of people. We live in the greatest age in human history.

Yet, we are told daily by the media, by the flat-earthers of the “green” movement, by doom-mongers such as the high priests of the global warming industry, that we have destroyed our planet, that we are a plague on the Earth, that we must repent and beg forgiveness by some kind of mix of returning to the caves from which we came millennia ago while simultaneously paying trillions in indulgences to the Russian mafia. Forgive me Father Gaia, for I have flown.

The greenies’ ideal solution to the human problem is presumably some sort of global Jonestown mass suicide.

Two problems there though: finding a suitably toxic yet environmentally-friendly poison; and the blight on the landscape of six billion rotting corpses.

While decomposition would soon work its magic, leaving behind a boneyard of skeletons could be seen by the Earth Mother as a rather disrespectful parting gift.

Presumably self-immolation would be out because of the carbon emissions.

Burial seems like the most eco-considerate option, with each of us turning the sod on one of our fellow squanderers before lying down in our own grave for a swig of jungle juice.

The last one standing could then perhaps douse themselves with sulphuric acid and jump down a well.

It’s good to have a clean planet, but exaggerating the problem is having an immense cost, which ordinary New Zealand families will soon be needlessly paying.

Millions of Africans have already died for the green religion, as food crops are used for biofuel, causing food prices to double.

And the greenies have the cheek to claim their (futile) efforts to cool the planet comes at no cost to those who live on it.

Too many Wellingtonians are reacting like humourless bores to the plan to erect a Wellywood sign at the entrance to Miramar.

Come on folks, don’t be so meanspirited!

Think what Peter Jackson, Richard Taylor and their team of filmic visionaries have done for our city.

Think about the loyalty shown by Jackson in insisting that Hollywood must come to his suburb, thus singlehandedly transforming Miramar into the world’s most unlikely movie mecca.

Think about the marketing value of crystallising that status into one whimsical word, and displaying that word to visitors.

Most of all, let’s show our fellow Kiwis that the wind hasn’t blown away our sense of humour.

I struck the same attitude when, in a letter to the editor, I christened our cosy little stadium the Cake Tin. What a fuss that still causes.

But as I pointed out then, this is a city where a Parliament building is called the Beehive, the cricket ground the Basin, and an old toilet block (now a Welsh restaurant) was known by all as the Taj Mahal.

In other words, quirky nicknames are part of our heritage. So let’s build on the tradition!

I hope Kerry Prendergast has the good sense to show leadership on this issue and override the kneejerk blurtings of the curmudgeons.

My last post showed where New Zealanders’ incomes would rank if we were a state of Australia. (9th out of 9.)

What if we extended that comparison to the whole of the Anglo world?

In such a union, we’d be one of 80: 50 states and 1 district of the USA; 6 states and 2 territories of Australia; 10 provinces and 3 territories of Canada; 4 countries and 2 Channel Islands of the UK; plus Ireland and us.

Of the 6 countries, we’d be the smallest. But of the 80 states, we’d be 36th.

50 of those 80 have populations between 1 and 10 million – 20 of those 50 between 3 and 6 million.

So at 4 million, we’re right in the middle of the pack. A bit smaller than British Columbia, Louisiana, Kentucky, Ireland and Queensland. And a bit bigger than Oregon, Alberta, Oklahoma, Connecticut and Iowa.

But when we rank the same states by standard of living, the pack shuffles. And poor old NZ just about falls off the table…

77th out of 80.

And if you said, “At least we’re richer than Northern Ireland and Wales,” don’t be too sure. Their figures were taken a year earlier than ours.

The only one of the 80 states we definitely pip is Prince Edward Island – a Canadian pimple with the population of Hamilton.

Now let’s decolour all states apart from New Zealand and our ten closest neighbours in the population rankings.

Again, you can see we’re by far the poorest. From $11,000 a year poorer than Queensland to $60,000 a year poorer than Alberta.

All of which begs three questions:

Are all 76 of New Zealand’s economic superiors awash with oil, gold or other natural assets that we lack?

Does our remoteness account for our failure to keep up with our population peers?

Or could it be that our poor performance is the legacy of a history of poor management?

I look forward to the government’s ambitious plan to catch up with Mississippi and Tasmania and keep our noses in front of those plucky Prince Edward Islanders.

I left National in 2008 because I could see that John Key had no ambition for New Zealand, only for himself and his party.

Two years later, Key and National are riding high on their wave of false promises, while the Sunday Star-Times reports the all-too-predictable reality: Kiwi wages slip further behind.

For once I can’t help but agree with Phil Goff, who describes Key’s promise of catching Australia as “reckless and dishonest”:

“He was undertaking to the New Zealand electorate that he had a secret plan whereby he could catch up with Australia, and the truth is he had no such plan. And, far from catching up, New Zealand has fallen further behind.”

Key’s motto, as far as I can see, is “You can fool most of the people most of the time.” And it seems to be working a treat…